Re: lockdep and threaded IRQs (was: ...)

[David Brownell]

On Tuesday 03 March 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i think you severely over-estimate the importance and ratio of 
> drivers that enable irqs within irq handlers. (Nor does anyone 
> want to break them really - we want to have a sane default and 
> we want to flag the broken cases as broken.)

For the record, I've been running for some time now
with a patch that issues a warning for each IRQ that
lockdep forces to use IRQF_DISABLED.

On my x86 systems, pretty much every driver triggers
that warning.  Which makes me think maybe that shoe
is being placed on the wrong foot:  use of IRQF_DISABLED
is the *EXCEPTION* not the rule.  At least on one major
Linux platform...


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/